1) The model for the transportation problem consists of 18 decision variables, representing the

number of barrels of wastes transported from each of the 6 plants to each of the 3 waste disposal
sites:
xij = Number of Barrels transported per week from plant i to the j-th waste disposal site,

where i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and j = A, B, C.
The objective function of the manager is to minimize the total transportation cost for all
shipments. Thus the objective function is the sum of the individual shipping costs from each
plant to each waste disposal site:
Minimize Z = 12 x1A + 15 x1B + 17 x1C + 14 x2 A + 9 x2B + 10 x2C + 13 x3 A + 20 x3B +11 x3C
+17 x4 A +16 x4B +19 x4C +7 x5 A +14 x5B +12 x5C +22 x6 A +16 x6B +18 x6C
The constraints in the model are the number of barrels of wastes available per week at each plant
and the number of barrels of wastes accommodated at each waste disposal site. There are 9
constraints- one for each plant supply and one for each waste disposal sites demand.
The six supply constraints are:
x1A + x1B + x1C = 35
x2 A + x2B + x2C = 26
x3 A + x3B + x3C = 42
x4 A + x4B + x4C = 53
x5 A + x5B + x5C = 29
x6 A + x6B + x6C = 38

As an example, here the supply constraint x1A + x1B + x1C = 35 represents the number of barrels
transported from the plant Kingsport to all the three waste disposal sites. The amount transported
from Kingsport is limited to the 35 barrels available.
The three demand constraints are:

x1A + x2 A + x3 A + x4 A + x5 A + x6 A 65
x1B + x2B + x3B + x4B + x5B + x6B 80
x1C + x2C + x3C + x4C + x5C + x6C 105

Here the demand constraint x1A + x2 A + x3 A + x4 A + x5 A + x6 A 65 represents the number of barrels

transported to the waste disposal site Whitewater from all the six plants. The barrel of wastes that
can accommodate in the waste disposal site Whitewater is limited to 65 barrels. The demand
constraints are inequalities because the total demand (65+80+105) = 250 exceeds the total
supply (26+42+53+29+38) = 223.
The linear programming model for the transportation problem is summarized as follows:
Minimize Z = 12 x1A + 15 x1B + 17 x1C + 14 x2 A + 9 x2B + 10 x2C + 13 x3 A + 20 x3B +11 x3C
+17 x4 A +16 x4B +19 x4C +7 x5 A +14 x5B +12 x5C +22 x6 A +16 x6B +18 x6C
Subject to
x1A + x1B + x1C = 35
x2 A + x2B + x2C = 26
x3 A + x3B + x3C = 42
x4 A + x4B + x4C = 53
x5 A + x5B + x5C = 29
x6 A + x6B + x6C = 38

x1A + x2 A + x3 A + x4 A + x5 A + x6 A 65
x1B + x2B + x3B + x4B + x5B + x6B 80
x1C + x2C + x3C + x4C + x5C + x6C 105
xij 0

2) Because the transportation model is formulated as a linear programming model, it can be

solved with Excel Solver. The spreadsheet solution is shown in the following table.
Plant
Kingsport
Danville
Macon
Selma
Columbus
Allentown
Waste
Received
Waste
Disposed
Cost=

Waste Disposal Sites

Whitewater
Los Canos
Duras
35.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
26.0
0.0
0.0
42.0
1.0
52.0
0.0
29.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
28.0
10.0

65.0

80.0

105.0

65.0

80.0

78.0

Supply
35.0
26.0
42.0
53.0
29.0
38.0

Waste
Shipped
35.0
26.0
42.0
53.0
29.0
38.0
223.0

223.0

2,822

Thus the optimum solution of the transportation problem is given in the following table.
From

Shipment
unit

To

Cost per unit Shipment cost

Kingsport

Whitewater

35

$12

$420

Danville

Duras

26

$10

$260

Macon

Duras

42

$11

$462

Selma

Whitewater

$17

$17

Selma

Los Canos

52

$16

$832

Columbus

Whitewater

29

$7

$203

Allentown

Los Canos

28

$16

$448

Allentown

Duras

10

$18

$180

Total Cost

The total transportation cost for the optimal route is $2822.

$2822

3) If each of the plant and waste disposal sites is considered as intermediate shipping points, the
transportation model becomes a transshipment model. The additional decision variables included
in the revised model are
xij = Number of barrels of waste shipped from plant i to plant j,

where i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and j = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
xkl = Number of barrels of waste shipped from waste disposal site k to waste disposal site l,

where k = A, B, C and l = A, B, C.
The new objective function of the transshipment model is
Minimize Z = 12 x1A + 15 x1B + 17 x1C + 14 x2 A + 9 x2B + 10 x2C + 13 x3 A + 20 x3B +11 x3C
+ 17 x4 A +16 x4B +19 x4C +7 x5 A +14 x5B +12 x5C +22 x6 A +16 x6B +18 x6C
+ 6 x12 + 4 x13 + 9 x14 + 7 x15 + 8 x16 + 6 x21 + 11 x23 + 10 x24 +12 x25 + 7 x26
+ 5 x31 + 11 x32 + 3 x34 + 7 x35 + 15 x36 + 9 x41 + 10 x42 + 3 x43 + 3 x45 + 16 x46
+ 7 x51 + 12 x52 + 7 x53 + 3 x54 + 14 x56 + 8 x61 + 7 x62 + 15 x63 + 16 x64 + 14 x65
+ 12 xAB + 10 x AC + 12 xBA + 15 xBC + 10 xCA + 15 xCB
The number of barrels of wastes available at plant i for shipment to one or more of the waste
disposal sites is given by
(Number of barrels already available at plant i) + (Number of barrels shipped to plant
i from other plants) (Number of barrels shipped from plant i to other plants)
Thus the six supply constraints now become:
x1A + x1B + x1C = 35 + ( x21 + x31 + x41 + x51 + x61 ) ( x12 + x13 + x14 + x15 + x16 )
x2 A + x2B + x2C = 26 + ( x12 + x32 + x42 + x52 + x62 ) ( x21 + x23 + x24 + x25 + x26 )
x3 A + x3B + x3C = 42 + ( x13 + x23 + x43 + x53 + x63 ) ( x31 + x32 + x34 + x35 + x36 )
x4 A + x4B + x4C = 53 + ( x14 + x24 + x34 + x54 + x64 ) ( x41 + x42 + x43 + x45 + x46 )

x5 A + x5B + x5C = 29 + ( x15 + x25 + x35 + x45 + x65 ) ( x51 + x52 + x53 + x54 + x56 )
x6 A + x6B + x6C = 38 + ( x16 + x26 + x36 + x46 + x56 ) ( x61 + x62 + x63 + x64 + x65 )

The number of barrels that can accommodate in the i-th waste disposal site is given by
(Number of barrels transported from the six plants to the i-th waste disposal site)
+ (Number of barrels shipped from other waste disposal sites to i-th waste disposal site)
(Number of barrels shipped to other waste disposal sites from i-th waste disposal site)

Thus the three demand constraints now become:

( x1A + x2 A + x3 A + x4 A + x5 A + x6 A ) + ( xBA + xCA ) ( xAB + x AC ) 65
( x1B + x2B + x3B + x4B + x5B + x6B ) + ( xAB + xCB ) ( xBA + xBC ) 80
( x1C + x2C + x3C + x4C + x5C + x6C ) + ( x AC + xBC ) ( xCA + xCB ) 105
Thus the linear programming model for the transshipment problem is summarized as follows:
Minimize Z = 12 x1A + 15 x1B + 17 x1C + 14 x2 A + 9 x2B + 10 x2C + 13 x3 A + 20 x3B +11 x3C
+ 17 x4 A +16 x4B +19 x4C +7 x5 A +14 x5B +12 x5C +22 x6 A +16 x6B +18 x6C
+ 6 x12 + 4 x13 + 9 x14 + 7 x15 + 8 x16 + 6 x21 + 11 x23 + 10 x24 +12 x25 + 7 x26
+ 5 x31 + 11 x32 + 3 x34 + 7 x35 + 15 x36 + 9 x41 + 10 x42 + 3 x43 + 3 x45 + 16 x46
+ 7 x51 + 12 x52 + 7 x53 + 3 x54 + 14 x56 + 8 x61 + 7 x62 + 15 x63 + 16 x64 + 14 x65
+ 12 xAB + 10 x AC + 12 xBA + 15 xBC + 10 xCA + 15 xCB
Subject to:
x1A + x1B + x1C = 35 + ( x21 + x31 + x41 + x51 + x61 ) ( x12 + x13 + x14 + x15 + x16 )

x2 A + x2B + x2C = 26 + ( x12 + x32 + x42 + x52 + x62 ) ( x21 + x23 + x24 + x25 + x26 )
x3 A + x3B + x3C = 42 + ( x13 + x23 + x43 + x53 + x63 ) ( x31 + x32 + x34 + x35 + x36 )
x4 A + x4B + x4C = 53 + ( x14 + x24 + x34 + x54 + x64 ) ( x41 + x42 + x43 + x45 + x46 )
x5 A + x5B + x5C = 29 + ( x15 + x25 + x35 + x45 + x65 ) ( x51 + x52 + x53 + x54 + x56 )
x6 A + x6B + x6C = 38 + ( x16 + x26 + x36 + x46 + x56 ) ( x61 + x62 + x63 + x64 + x65 )

( x1A + x2 A + x3 A + x4 A + x5 A + x6 A ) + ( xBA + xCA ) ( xAB + x AC ) 65

( x1B + x2B + x3B + x4B + x5B + x6B ) + ( xAB + xCB ) ( xBA + xBC ) 80
( x1C + x2C + x3C + x4C + x5C + x6C ) + ( x AC + xBC ) ( xCA + xCB ) 105
xij 0

4) The computer solution for the transshipment model is obtained using Excel Solver and the
output is given below. For doing the analysis using Excel solver we assume the shipping cost per
barrel for the decision variables x11 , x22 , x33 , x44 , x55 , x66 , xAA , xBB , xCC are assumed to be 100 in
order to make sure that the variable representing that routes do not have a value in the optimal
solution.
Plant
Kingsport
Danville
Macon
Selma
Columbus
Allentown
Waste
Received

Kingsport
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Danville
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Plant
Macon
19.0
0.0
0.0
17.0
0.0
0.0

Selma
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Columbus
0.0
0.0
0.0
36.0
0.0
0.0

Allentown
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0

0.0

36.0

0.0

36.0

0.0

Plant
Kingsport
Danville
Macon
Selma
Columbus
Allentown
Waste Received

Waste Disposal Site

Whitewater
Los Canos
Duras
Waste Received
Waste
Accommodation
Waste Disposed

Cost=

Waste Disposal Sites

Los
Whitewater
Canos Duras
0.0
16.0
0.0
0.0
26.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
78.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
65.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
38.0
0.0
65.0
80.0
78.0
Waste Disposal Site
Los
Whitewater
Canos Duras
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
65.0
65.0

80.0
80.0

105.0
78.0

Supply

Accum
Supply

35.0
26.0
42.0
53.0
29.0
38.0
223.0

Waste
Dispatched
0.0
0.0
0.0

223.0

2,630

Thus the optimum solution of the transshipment problem is given in the following table.
From

To

Shipment unit Cost per unit Shipment cost

Kingsport

Macon

19

$4

$76

Kingsport

Los Canos

16

$15

$240

Danville

Los Canos

26

$9

$234

Macon

Duras

78

$11

$858

Selma

Macon

17

$3

$51

Selma

Columbus

36

$3

$108

Columbus

Whitewater

65

$7

$455

Allentown

Los Canos

38

$16

$608

Total Cost

$2630

16.0
26.0
78.0
0.0
65.0
38.0
223.0

Thus, the total transportation cost for the optimal route is $2630.

5) The total transportation cost for the initial transportation model is obtained as $2822. The
optimal routes and the corresponding units to be shipped if the units are shipping directly from
each of the six plants to each of the three waste disposal sites are summarized in the following
table.
From (Plant)

To (Waste Disposal
Site)

Shipment unit

Kingsport

Whitewater

35

Danville

Duras

26

Macon

Duras

42

Selma

Whitewater

Selma

Los Canos

52

Columbus

Whitewater

29

Allentown

Los Canos

28

Allentown

Duras

10

If each of the plants and waste disposal sites is considered as intermediate shipping points, the
total transportation cost for the revised transshipment model is obtained as $2630. The optimal
routes and the corresponding barrels to be shipped are shown in the following table.
From (Plant)

To

Shipment unit

Kingsport

Macon (Plant)

19

Kingsport

Los Canos (Waste Disposal Site)

16

Danville

Los Canos (Waste Disposal Site)

26

Macon

Duras (Waste Disposal Site)

78

Selma

Macon (Plant)

17

Selma

Columbus (Plant)

36

Columbus

Whitewater (Waste Disposal Site)

65

Allentown

Los Canos (Waste Disposal Site)

38

Thus if Rachel considers each of the plants and waste disposal sites as intermediate shipping
points she can reduce the total transportation cost by $192 per week.
If the plant and waste disposal sites are considered as intermediate shipping points, it is
assumed that the only cost Stateline incurs is the actual transportation cost. This may not be
practical in general. Only the cost factor is considered in the transshipment model. But there may
be some other factors like time of transportation, limited storage capacity at various plants etc.
These factors are not considered in the study. These are some limitations of the study.

The Excel Snap shot are summarized below.